You are viewing an archive of the old fxhome.com forums. The community has since moved to hitfilm.com.

Does CompositePro plugin w/Premiere 2.0? Help!

Posted: Sat, 7th Jun 2008, 11:53pm

Post 1 of 23

Elijah

Force: 1000 | Joined: 8th Jun 2008 | Posts: 42

CompositeLab Pro User PhotoKey 4 User

Gold Member

Hi everyone,

I hope I am at the end of the headaches. Our company has Premiere Pro 2.0. We had purchased a nice green screen and professional lighting. We even bought a light meter. The green screen was about 110-130 Foot Candles evenly lit all the way across by using 2x500 watt tungsten (4 total) on each side with diffuser umbrellas. We did not use a backlight. Our talent was about 5 feet in front of the green screen.

The video appears very grainy and almost flickery sometimes so I am wondering if there were some settings wrong with the camera (Canon XL-2) when it was taped.

The keying software within premiere seems incredibly crappy and hard to use, just like everything else in premiere. I am seriously beginning to think premiere is just a big pile of crap. Ulead Video Studio 11.5 seems to kick the crap out of it so far! I used premiere 7 years ago and it seems like it has gotten worse, I thought it was tough back then and now I just think they have no clue how to design a UI.

If I buy composite pro will I be able to use this with teh crappy premiere software? How does this work? I have been searching and in the chat room but cannot find the answer. The promo video said it would work with Premiere.

Green bleed is heavy on the talent? What should the foot candle reading be on my greenscreen?

I can upload sample, will that help?
Posted: Sun, 8th Jun 2008, 12:00am

Post 2 of 23

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

There's usually a green bleed over, which is why spill suppression is an important part of the compositing process.

I'm not sure why so many people ask if the products at here work with "editing software x". There's no integration that goes on whereby the applications have to communicate in any way with each other.

You render out a clip from your editor, you work on that clip in one of the FXhome apps and then render the work out as a video file which you then reimport into your editor.

In your case as you're using the XL2 you'd be working with uncompressed DV. if your footage is flickery then it's possible there's an interlacing issue or problem with either the camera, tape or simply how you shot the footage.

-Matt
Posted: Sun, 8th Jun 2008, 12:09am

Post 3 of 23

Elijah

Force: 1000 | Joined: 8th Jun 2008 | Posts: 42

CompositeLab Pro User PhotoKey 4 User

Gold Member

Ok, I rewatched the promo video at tape tube and it said compatible with premiere, I just got the impression it worked in conjunction. If this works I can live with that then.

If I upload a sample could you show me what Composite Pro can do to it?
Posted: Sun, 8th Jun 2008, 12:30am

Post 4 of 23

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Elijah wrote:

Ok, I rewatched the promo video at tape tube and it said compatible with premiere, I just got the impression it worked in conjunction. If this works I can live with that then.

If I upload a sample could you show me what Composite Pro can do to it?
Surely it'd be a better idea for you to download the program demo and try it out yourself? razz

-Matt
Posted: Sun, 8th Jun 2008, 12:35am

Post 5 of 23

Elijah

Force: 1000 | Joined: 8th Jun 2008 | Posts: 42

CompositeLab Pro User PhotoKey 4 User

Gold Member

I am in the process of doing that and watching tutorials. I don't have experience with this and everything I have been rendering looks junky. I am thinking the source footage may be the problem.
Posted: Sun, 8th Jun 2008, 12:47am

Post 6 of 23

Axeman

Force: 17995 | Joined: 20th Jan 2002 | Posts: 6124

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker MacOS User

SuperUser

I'm sure if you upload a sample a few people will give it a go and show what kind of results are possible, and likely you can get some advice as well, if there are problems with the footage.
Posted: Sun, 8th Jun 2008, 1:41am

Post 7 of 23

Elijah

Force: 1000 | Joined: 8th Jun 2008 | Posts: 42

CompositeLab Pro User PhotoKey 4 User

Gold Member

Ok, these are real short clips but they should work.

I exported from the original DV AVI in Premiere as "Microsoft DV AVI". "Uncompressed Microsoft AVI" would not play back in WMP as there was a error downloading codec. I am confused by these export options because there is also a "Microsoft AVI" that uses a Cinepak Codec by Radius. So I picked the one with "DV" in it.

When I pick the export it gives me a option to "deinterlace". I exported one clip like that and the same clip as progressive which appears when the "deinterlace" box is "unchecked". I always thought "progressive" was "deinterlaced". Anyways, when I import clip 1.1 (deinterlaced)into Composite it looks jaggy on the edges even if I select deinterlace-odd or deinterlace-even and even progressive (which I thought WAS deinterlace)

Now when I import clip 2.1 (progressive) it still looks slightly jaggy but not so much when I select the progressive setting in CLP. His tie looks noticeably jaggy on playback.

2.1 has a much brighter backlight as we did not use diffuser umbrellas on those. We have a fair amount of footage with no diffusion taht is very similar to 2.1 with the green desk and heavy green bleed on his ears as well. 1.1 and 1.3 have diffuser umbrellas on them and those were the clips that measured 110-130 foot candles.

As you can also see the desk in 2.1 has severe reflection. We sort of fixed that in Premiere with a garbage matte and imposing a second video overtop and adjusting the brightness and contrast. But it is still not that great.

I must say Composite's Keyer has produced much better results than premiere's keyer in a fraction of the time, however, I feel as if I am not doing something right still especially since the video looks jagged when imported.

Any help is appreciated. Each clip is around 12 MB.
http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/20232/test_fxhome_1.1_deinterlaced.avi (diffusion, 110-130 foot candles, looks jaggy on all CLP settings when imported)
http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/20232/test_fxhome_1.3_progressive.avi (diffusion, 110-130 foot candle)
http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/20232/test_fxhome_2.1_progressive.avi (no diffusion, desk reflection, smoothest looking when imported but still jaggy)

Edit: 2.1 also has this weird flicker in the clip, especially the desk. 1.1 and 1.3 also have it to a degree but not nearly as much. 1.1 (deinterlaced) plays very jaggy in WMP and also when imported to CLP.

Last edited Sun, 8th Jun 2008, 2:03am; edited 3 times in total.

Posted: Sun, 8th Jun 2008, 1:57am

Post 8 of 23

Elijah

Force: 1000 | Joined: 8th Jun 2008 | Posts: 42

CompositeLab Pro User PhotoKey 4 User

Gold Member

Ok, I am an idiot. The file size is the same with 1.1 and 1.2. I am uploading 1.3 right now. It is progressive. It looks much better in WMP and CLP now. So tell me, are we supposed to bring in interlaced footage or non-interlaced (deinterlaced) footage into CLP? I just can't get it to work if I set it to "Deinterlace".

I re-edited the entire above post in case you were wondering.

Any suggestions on optimal settings for these clips would be awesome! If I can get some clean clips out of this I can get authorization to purchase this software. Does anyone even key with Premiere Pro?
Posted: Sun, 8th Jun 2008, 2:17am

Post 9 of 23

Elijah

Force: 1000 | Joined: 8th Jun 2008 | Posts: 42

CompositeLab Pro User PhotoKey 4 User

Gold Member

Well, it said to export the same as source so I picked Direct Show since that matched the avi container but I just rendered as .mov DV/NTSC Best and it is loads better!!! This was using the progressive file.

This wasn't with the color difference effect but just with the green screen. I would still like clarification on the whole interlace, progressive, deinterlace issue if anyone has any advice. Also optimal settings if anyone has a chance to play with these clips. I will keep watching tutorials and experimenting in the meantime.
Posted: Sun, 8th Jun 2008, 2:22am

Post 10 of 23

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

The general rule of thumb is to always work with what you filmed at, and if need be - change it in your final output render dependent on what medium you are outputting to.

i.e. You have shot and edited a film in DV Pal interlaced and are creating a dvd to be watched on tv sets as well as a version for the internet. You would export an interlaced version for the DVD, and a deinterlaced version for the web.

-Matt
Posted: Sun, 8th Jun 2008, 2:36am

Post 11 of 23

Elijah

Force: 1000 | Joined: 8th Jun 2008 | Posts: 42

CompositeLab Pro User PhotoKey 4 User

Gold Member

Thanks for your reply. Well the footage is interlaced then. So exporting in "progressive" is actually interlaced and should be fine then? It will end up in flash. Or should I actually select interlace, lower/upper field first?

http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/20232/premiere_settings_interlace1.1.jpg
http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/20232/premiere_settings_interlace1.2.jpg
Posted: Sun, 8th Jun 2008, 3:35am

Post 12 of 23

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Elijah wrote:

Thanks for your reply. Well the footage is interlaced then. So exporting in "progressive" is actually interlaced and should be fine then? It will end up in flash. Or should I actually select interlace, lower/upper field first?

http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/20232/premiere_settings_interlace1.1.jpg
http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/20232/premiere_settings_interlace1.2.jpg
Except Progressive Footage means it is not interlaced, the opposite in fact. When you deinterlace footage it becomes progressive.

You can read up on it here : http://www.100fps.com/

-Matt
Posted: Sun, 8th Jun 2008, 3:37am

Post 13 of 23

Elijah

Force: 1000 | Joined: 8th Jun 2008 | Posts: 42

CompositeLab Pro User PhotoKey 4 User

Gold Member

Hybrid-Halo wrote:

Elijah wrote:

Thanks for your reply. Well the footage is interlaced then. So exporting in "progressive" is actually interlaced and should be fine then? It will end up in flash. Or should I actually select interlace, lower/upper field first?

http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/20232/premiere_settings_interlace1.1.jpg
http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/20232/premiere_settings_interlace1.2.jpg
Except Progressive Footage means it is not interlaced, the opposite in fact. When you deinterlace footage it becomes progressive.

You can read up on it here : http://www.100fps.com/

-Matt
Well, thats what I thought. Why is premiere giving a progressive option in the interlace drop-down then??
Posted: Sun, 8th Jun 2008, 3:41am

Post 14 of 23

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Because the application is often used for working with Progressive footage where the editor will want to export his footage correctly.
Posted: Sun, 8th Jun 2008, 3:55am

Post 15 of 23

Elijah

Force: 1000 | Joined: 8th Jun 2008 | Posts: 42

CompositeLab Pro User PhotoKey 4 User

Gold Member

Hybrid-Halo wrote:

Because the application is often used for working with Progressive footage where the editor will want to export his footage correctly.
Ok, I don't see why they just give it a seperate radio button than to mix it in with the interlace stuff but oh well.

I just found this thread and it seems as if it is normal to import footage and have jagged edges around your composites while working on them. This thread helped a bunch and I have gotten some great results already.

Posting a screen shot is much faster than posting a video clip. And it seems people can whip out some settings for you while I am in my learning curve mode. I am amazed at the results I just got on one clip!!
Posted: Sun, 8th Jun 2008, 4:02am

Post 16 of 23

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Elijah wrote:

Ok, I don't see why they just give it a seperate radio button than to mix it in with the interlace stuff but oh well.
Because it's intrinsically related to whether or not and how the footage is (or isn't) interlaced. razz

Glad to hear you're experiencing some success, The programs here really do have a good keyer - the pre-key options being life savers. Not to mention the spill suppressor and the easy to use lightwrap.

-Matt
Posted: Sun, 8th Jun 2008, 1:10pm

Post 17 of 23

Elijah

Force: 1000 | Joined: 8th Jun 2008 | Posts: 42

CompositeLab Pro User PhotoKey 4 User

Gold Member

Elijah wrote:

Hybrid-Halo wrote:

Because the application is often used for working with Progressive footage where the editor will want to export his footage correctly.
Ok, I don't see why they just give it a seperate radio button than to mix it in with the interlace stuff but oh well.

I just found this thread and it seems as if it is normal to import footage and have jagged edges around your composites while working on them. This thread helped a bunch and I have gotten some great results already.

Posting a screen shot is much faster than posting a video clip. And it seems people can whip out some settings for you while I am in my learning curve mode. I am amazed at the results I just got on one clip!!
I forgot to add the link --> http://fxhome.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=34822&highlight=spill+suppresion
Posted: Sun, 8th Jun 2008, 2:51pm

Post 18 of 23

Elijah

Force: 1000 | Joined: 8th Jun 2008 | Posts: 42

CompositeLab Pro User PhotoKey 4 User

Gold Member

Hybrid-Halo wrote:

Elijah wrote:

Ok, I don't see why they just give it a seperate radio button than to mix it in with the interlace stuff but oh well.
Because it's intrinsically related to whether or not and how the footage is (or isn't) interlaced. razz

Glad to hear you're experiencing some success, The programs here really do have a good keyer - the pre-key options being life savers. Not to mention the spill suppressor and the easy to use lightwrap.

-Matt
Ok, so what does deinterlace do then? How is deinterlace different from progressive? From what I understand is that progressive is kinda like deinterlace but progressive still mixes frames whereas deinterlaced actually just makes full complete frames.


I will be headed to work in a bit to do some more testing but still could not get the video within Clab to not have the jaggy edges, even with full/anti aliasing turned on? Is it normal to have crumby video in the window?
Posted: Sun, 8th Jun 2008, 4:43pm

Post 19 of 23

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Camera Footage is either progressive or interlaced. One or the other, and the method of turning interlaced footage to progressive footage is called de-interlacing. Progressive to Interlaced footage would be called interlacing.

De-interlacing is better explained here : http://www.100fps.com. Though put simply, interlaced footage consists of two fields per frame which get merged into one frame when it becomes progressive. There are different methods of doing this which are explained on that site.

-Matt
Posted: Sun, 8th Jun 2008, 6:23pm

Post 20 of 23

Elijah

Force: 1000 | Joined: 8th Jun 2008 | Posts: 42

CompositeLab Pro User PhotoKey 4 User

Gold Member

Hybrid-Halo wrote:

Camera Footage is either progressive or interlaced. One or the other, and the method of turning interlaced footage to progressive footage is called de-interlacing. Progressive to Interlaced footage would be called interlacing.

De-interlacing is better explained here : http://www.100fps.com. Though put simply, interlaced footage consists of two fields per frame which get merged into one frame when it becomes progressive. There are different methods of doing this which are explained on that site.

-Matt
I am reading this site and have read part of it many years ago but not to thoroughly.

I am not finding a clear answer to why Premiere offers BOTH a deinterlace AND progressive export setting for Microsoft DV AVI in the screen shots I posted. I thought deinterlace EQUALS progressive?

I will keep reading but if anyone can save me another couple hours I would love that (who wouldn't) smile
Posted: Sun, 8th Jun 2008, 7:03pm

Post 21 of 23

Axeman

Force: 17995 | Joined: 20th Jan 2002 | Posts: 6124

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker MacOS User

SuperUser

If the footage you are working with is already progressive, and you want to export to progressive, then you select Progressive. If the footage is currently interlaced, and you want to export to progressive, you select Deinterlace. You have to have both options to cover the two different types of source footage.
Posted: Sun, 8th Jun 2008, 7:47pm

Post 22 of 23

Elijah

Force: 1000 | Joined: 8th Jun 2008 | Posts: 42

CompositeLab Pro User PhotoKey 4 User

Gold Member

Axeman wrote:

If the footage you are working with is already progressive, and you want to export to progressive, then you select Progressive. If the footage is currently interlaced, and you want to export to progressive, you select Deinterlace. You have to have both options to cover the two different types of source footage.
Wow! Thanks. How did you know that?
Posted: Sun, 8th Jun 2008, 8:02pm

Post 23 of 23

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Elijah wrote:

Axeman wrote:

If the footage you are working with is already progressive, and you want to export to progressive, then you select Progressive. If the footage is currently interlaced, and you want to export to progressive, you select Deinterlace. You have to have both options to cover the two different types of source footage.
Wow! Thanks. How did you know that?
Mostly because it makes absolute sense, but also partly because it's our jobs to know. wink